The Banning Of Smoking.

[padi56]

Smoking is now banned in all public places in Ireland and, most recently, in Scotland. For those of us who do not smoke, and I count myself in that group, that's no problem at all. However, it does mean that, at a stroke, all smokers are prevented from going into premises frequented by the public whilst indulging their addiction. Now there are myriad arguments put forward for and against such a ban. Up to now, to my mind, the arguments in favour of a ban have been ahead on points. Not by a really big margin, but ahead nevertheless.

While this has all been going on, and the arguments swaying back and forth, I have several times wondered whether I should worry about it resulting in further and unacceptable erosion of my basic rights.

Well the bleeding political correct,H/S,and sandalista mind-control gestapo have just struck. And given our PMs predilection for trailing along in America's wake, it is probably just a matter of time before they start trying it on for size here too. A California town has banned smoking in all public places where people can be exposed to second-hand smoke. Calabasas is the first town to act after California classified tobacco smoke as a toxic air pollutant. Anybody who disobeys is subject to a $500 fine. So now, even in the open air, smoking is verboten! Jawohl, mein commandant! It's not anti-smoking regulations in particular I'm moaning about, it's all the little creeping constraints on long established custom and practise of various sorts and the feeling that what we, the public, think about it doesn't matter a toss!

This kind of hateful, bleeding, petty dictatorship really gets my goat. Toward the end of Oliver Cromwell's life his Major Generals governed England like petty local dictators, interfering exasperatingly in private life. Abolishing mince pies and Christmas and maypoles and suchlike. To such a degree that ordinary folk flocked to cheer and dance in the street when Cromwell died and the king was restored. Having sampled a puritanical dictatorship the British never wanted another one. Our Tone is, hopefully, approaching the end of his own life, politically speaking, so I hope he is taking note!

But now it seems to be creeping in by the back door. And the British seem to have lost the bloody-minded pugnaciousness that would have led to these bringers of misery getting unceremoniously buggered off out of it hitherto. There is a sizable band of these modern-day Major Generals out there. Each one holding his little wedge in his reptilian paw, while his beady eyes estimate the chances of stuffing it up our pitifully exposed backsides. It makes me have vicious and vindictive fantasies. I wish there was a vigilante style group who would give some of these pr!cks a bloody good thrashing. That might put a glint of fear in the eyes of the rest of the complete shower . Or how about stringing up one or two from a lamp post? Yeah, that would be good. I could spend quite some time luxuriating in that little daydream. Unhappily, all it's ever likely to be is a daydream.I sometimes wonder now if its because we are British, and we are now trained from birth, to take it up the ars# without complaining whether we like it or not.

Just look at the situation in other countries - France in particular. It may only be 20 odd miles across a bit of water, but the instant the government does something even remotely contentious there's rioting in the streets and the ports get blockaded.
Over here, we're dumbed down to the point of near-worthlessness, so we just roll over and take it up the ars#.
So we accept hunting bans, smoking bans, curtailment of our freedoms and everything else, just so long as the fundamentals of our sometimes pointless existence don't change.

The only thing that would ever provoke mass outrage in the UK now what I can see, would be for the government, to ban Big Brother or bloody Eastenders.
End of Rant.

In Ontario we've had a ban on smoking in public places for years. Even our transit companies have banned smoking on their property. Personally I think it's great. There's nothing more revolting that taking in someone else's second hand smoke. And believe me, I know all about this.

My parents both smoked and for the last 10 years leading up to my dad quitting, he was chain-smoking five packs of Rothman's a day. Mum smoked two to three packs a day. So you can imagine when we went on our family vacations, always by car for stretches up to 10 or 12 hours of driving... that's a boatload of second hand smoke to inhale. It disgusts me.

Now that I have a child, I get infuriated when I see people smoking anywhere near my daughter. I've made a few comments to people. It also amazes me that today's young kids (teens and 20s) smoke as much as they do. They know better.

And now living in Ottawa, the city is proliferated by people who come across the river from Quebec to work, and it seems if you're from Quebec, you smoke. So any time you want to enter or exit a building, I have to hold my breath to make sure i don't injest their toxic chemicals.

Studies show that by reducing or eliminating smoking, there is a direct correlation to a drop in health care costs. Since our healthcare is 'free' in Canada (i.e., comes out of our taxes) if smokers weren't eating up tax dollars in cancer treatments... we'd have a bigger surplus of cash nationally, which should relate to lower taxes (should).

Yes, tobacco is big business and lots of Canadians make their living from the industry. But farmers are being given subsidies to shift their crops to non-tobacco plants and doing quite well.

I don't care what a person does in the privacy of their home or automobile, but smoking in a public place is a health risk to us all. Ban it, I say.

Originally Posted by Atomic

In Ontario we've had a ban on smoking in public places for years. Even our transit companies have banned smoking on their property. Personally I think it's great. There's nothing more revolting that taking in someone else's second hand smoke. And believe me, I know all about this.

My parents both smoked and for the last 10 years leading up to my dad quitting, he was chain-smoking five packs of Rothman's a day. Mum smoked two to three packs a day. So you can imagine when we went on our family vacations, always by car for stretches up to 10 or 12 hours of driving... that's a boatload of second hand smoke to inhale. It disgusts me.

Now that I have a child, I get infuriated when I see people smoking anywhere near my daughter. I've made a few comments to people. It also amazes me that today's young kids (teens and 20s) smoke as much as they do. They know better.

And now living in Ottawa, the city is proliferated by people who come across the river from Quebec to work, and it seems if you're from Quebec, you smoke. So any time you want to enter or exit a building, I have to hold my breath to make sure i don't injest their toxic chemicals.

Studies show that by reducing or eliminating smoking, there is a direct correlation to a drop in health care costs. Since our healthcare is 'free' in Canada (i.e., comes out of our taxes) if smokers weren't eating up tax dollars in cancer treatments... we'd have a bigger surplus of cash nationally, which should relate to lower taxes (should).

Yes, tobacco is big business and lots of Canadians make their living from the industry. But farmers are being given subsidies to shift their crops to non-tobacco plants and doing quite well.

I don't care what a person does in the privacy of their home or automobile, but smoking in a public place is a health risk to us all. Ban it, I say.

Yesssss!

Coming from the region of Ontario that is "tobacco contry" I can tell you that the "poor farmers" (living in huge houses, driving the nice cars, and owning the big boats) who are now finding out their toxic crop is less popular than it once was are all talking crap when they say they are hurting. Over the years they have been provided so many opportunities and incentives to move on to other crops by the government, it's not even funny. Most ignored the help that was offered, and are now crying because of the loss in revenue.

[Goodwatch]

Yup, same here. Smoking banned in all public places and government buildings. Smoking almost banned on railway stations (except around pathetic designated ‘smoke poles’) even in the outside air. Smoking banned at my place of work except in ‘smoke rooms’. Entering such a room is literally breath taking and even 1 minute spoils you cloths.

But when you think of it, our governments are hypocrites. Why? They allow a product to be sold to the general public that contains noxious substances and is a proven killer. It wouldn’t pass any test and should thus be banned. But it isn’t. Why? Boatloads of tax money. As long as this outweighs the general health related costs every society has to make, it will be allowed.

But as John said: what you do in the privacy of your own home is your business and we are being meddled with by our governments enough as it is. These, and other issues (drinking, unhealthy foods) are subject of intense ethical debates over here. Example: a man has undergone intensive (and very expensive) treatment to cure mouth cancer caused by heavy smoking. His doctors told him to give up smoking for good. He doesn’t listen, picks up the habit again and is back in hospital. Does he get treatment again? And again? Very tough question, because what if that man would happen to be your own father?

[dman]

That is not a question I would like to have to answer Frans.

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by dman

That is not a question I would like to have to answer Frans.

I know and that makes it so difficult. I can't say I'm a complete non-smoker (the odd cigar now and then) but I don't like the cigarettes at all. I'm trying very hard to keep my daughter from smoking but I'm afraid it looks a lost cause. She (and her friends) are not allowed to smoke in the house but we can’t control what she does outside. And boy, did we explain the hazards of smoking. Sigh…

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

.

But as John said: what you do in the privacy of your own home is your business and we are being meddled with by our governments enough as it is. These, and other issues (drinking, unhealthy foods) are subject of intense ethical debates over here. Example: a man has undergone intensive (and very expensive) treatment to cure mouth cancer caused by heavy smoking. His doctors told him to give up smoking for good. He doesn’t listen, picks up the habit again and is back in hospital. Does he get treatment again? And again? Very tough question, because what if that man would happen to be you own father?

That is the point I was trying to get in my posts,its not so much the smoking ban, but being told you cannot do things that folks have done for donkeys years.

Good point Frans. Same for the sale of alcohol. Deaths that are related to drinking number in the hundreds in Canada each year. The gov't says 'don't drink and drive' and yet people still do it. Hell, I've even been to police/gov't functions where off-duty cops and politicians are drinking like fish and then drive home fully loaded.

But as long as the gov't can tax these products to the hilt, they won't get banned outright because it's too big a loss of revenue. If they're going to keep smoking and drinking legal (with appropriate warnings) then they should legalize pot completely and also legalize prostitution... think of the tax boon!

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by Atomic

Good point Frans. Same for the sale of alcohol. Deaths that are related to drinking number in the hundreds in Canada each year. The gov't says 'don't drink and drive' and yet people still do it. Hell, I've even been to police/gov't functions where off-duty cops and politicians are drinking like fish and then drive home fully loaded.

But as long as the gov't can tax these products to the hilt, they won't get banned outright because it's too big a loss of revenue. If they're going to keep smoking and drinking legal (with appropriate warnings) then they should legalize pot completely and also legalize prostitution... think of the tax boon!

Over here, prostitution IS legal. And know what? The girls pay income tax

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Over here, prostitution IS legal. And know what? The girls pay income tax

That's odd!! The world over, any income gained from prosititution is totally tax free!!

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

That's odd!! The world over, any income gained from prosititution is totally tax free!!

Because it's illegal. In many countries a crime. Bit hard to levy tax on a crime I think.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Because it's illegal. In many countries a crime. Bit hard to levy tax on a crime I think.

No, no...I'm talking about places where it is completely legalised...like NZ for example. Couple of years ago a legislation was passed totally legalising the world's oldest profession. And they don't pay a damn cent in taxes.

JJ

[Goodwatch]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

No, no...I'm talking about places where it is completely legalised...like NZ for example. Couple of years ago a legislation was passed totally legalising the world's oldest profession. And they don't pay a damn cent in taxes.

JJ

Your tax men are sleeping! Easy money

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

No, no...I'm talking about places where it is completely legalised...like NZ for example. Couple of years ago a legislation was passed totally legalising the world's oldest profession. And they don't pay a damn cent in taxes.

JJ

That's because the prostitutes in New Zealand don't have any clients. The potential clients are all too busy sheep-shagging, which is free. LOL



Frans, that's my point entirely. If they legalize it, the girls (and guys) have to declare their income and pay taxes. Legalizing would also bring about more disease control and health issues, too.

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Goodwatch

Your tax men are sleeping! Easy money

Yes, probably sleeping with the enemy!!